A formal ontological perspective on the behaviors and functions of technical artifacts

Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 3-21

  Borgo, Stefano ^a   Carrara, Massimiliano ^b   Garbacz, Pawel ^c   Vermaas, Pieter E ^d  

^a CNR   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^c JOHN PAUL II CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF LUBLIN   (Poland)

^d DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Behavior; Engineering; Formal Ontology; Function; Technical Artifact

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR; CONCEPT STRUCTURES; ENGINEERING CONCEPTS; ENGINEERING DOMAINS; ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE; FORMAL ONTOLOGY; FUNCTIONAL REPRESENTATION; INFORMATION SHARING; INPUT AND OUTPUTS; JOSEPHSON; PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE; RATIONAL AGENTS; TECHNICAL ARTIFACT; TECHNICAL ARTIFACTS;

KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING; ONTOLOGY; REENGINEERING; REVERSE ENGINEERING;

ENGINEERING EXHIBITIONS;

EID: 68349128147     PISSN: 08900604     EISSN: 14691760     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0890060409000079     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Bhatta, S., & Goel, A. (2002). Design patterns and creative design. In Engineering Design Synthesis (Chakrabarti, A., Ed.) pp. 271-284. Berlin: Springer.
2. Bhatta, S., Goel, A., & Prabhakar, S. (1994). Innovation in analogical design: a model-based approach. Artificial Intelligence in Design - 1994 (Gero, J., & Sudweeks, F., Eds.), pp. 57-74. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
3. Borgo, S. (2007). How formal ontology can help civil engineers. In Ontologies for Urban Development (Teller, J., Lee, J., & Roussey, C., Eds.), pp. 37-45. Berlin: Springer.
4. Borgo, S., Carrara, M., Vermaas, P.E., & Garbacz, P. (2006). Behavior of a technical artifact: an ontological perspective in engineering. Formal Ontology in Information Systems: Proc. 4th Int. Conf. (FOIS 2006). Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications (Bennett, B., & Fellbaum, C., Eds.), Vol. 150, pp. 214-225. Amsterdam: IOS.
5. Borgo, S., & Leitao, P. (2007). Foundations for a core ontology of manufacturing. In Ontologies: A Handbook of Principles, Concepts and Applications in Information Systems. Integrated Series in Information Systems (Kishore, R., Ramesh, R., & Sharman, R., Eds.), Vol. 14, pp. 752-776. Dordrecht: Springer.
6. Borgo, S., & Vieu, L. (in press). Artefacts in formal ontology. In Handbook of PhilosophyofTechnologyand Engineering Science. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7. Bryant, C.R., McAdams, D.A., Stone, R.B., Kurtoglu, T., & Campbell, M.I. (2006). Avalidation study of an automated concept generator design tool. Proc. 2006 ASME IDETC/CIE Conf., Paper No. DETC2006-99489, Philadelphia, PA, September 10-13.
8. Bucciarelli, L.L. (1994). Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
9. Chandrasekaran, B. (1994). Functional representation and causal processes. Advances in Computers 38, 73-143.
10. Chandrasekaran, B. (2005). Representing function. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 19(1), 65-74.
11. Chandrasekaran, B., & Josephson, J.R. (2000). Function in device representation. Engineering With Computers 16(3/4), 162-177.
12. Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, R., & Benjamins, V. (1999). What are ontologies, and why do we need them? IEEE Intelligent Systems 14, 20-26.
13. Chittaro, L., & Kumar, A.N. (1998). Reasoning about function and its applications to engineering. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 12, 331-336.
14. Dretske, F. (1988). Explaining Behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
15. Fine, K. (1995). Ontological dependence. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95, pp. 269-290.
16. Garbacz, P. (2006). A formal model of functional decomposition. Proc. 2006 ASME IDETC/CIE Conf., Paper No. DETC2006-99097, Philadelphia, PA, September 10-13.
17. Gero, J.S. (1990). A knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine 11(4), 26-36.
18. Gero, J.S., & Kannengiesser, U. (2004). The situated function-behavior- structure framework. Design Studies 25, 373-391.
19. Goel, A. (1991). A model-based approach to case adaptation. Proc. 13th Annual Cognitive Science Conf., pp. 143-148. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Hirtz, J., Stone, R.B., McAdams, D.A., Szykman, S., & Wood, K.L. (2002). A functional basis for engineering design: reconciling and evolving previous efforts. Research in Engineering Design 13, 65-82.
21. Kitamura, Y., Koji, Y., & Mizoguchi, R. (2005/2006). An ontological model of device function: industrial deployment and lessons learned. Applied Ontology 1, 237-262.
22. Kitamura, Y., Sano, T., Nambo, K., & Mizoguchi, R. (2002). A functional concept ontology and its application to automatic identification of functional structures. Advanced Engineering Informatics 16(2), 145-163.
23. Lehmann, J., Borgo, S., Masolo, C., & Gangemi, A. (2004). Causality and causation in dolce. Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. FOIS 2004 (Varzi, A.C., & Vieu, L., Eds.), pp. 273-284. Amsterdam: IOS.
24. Lemmon, E.J. (1965). Beginning Logic. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
25. Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., & Oltramari, A. (2003). Wonderweb deliverabled18. Accessed at http://www.loa-cnr.it/Papers/ D18.pdf
26. Mizoguchi, R., Sunagawa, E., Kozaki, K., & Kitamura, Y. (2007). Model of roles within an ontology development tool: Hozo. Journal of Applied Ontology 2, 159-179.
27. Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (1998). Engineering Design. Berlin: Springer.
28. Rosenman, M.A., & Gero, J.S. (1998). Purpose and function in design. Design Studies 19, 161-186.
29. Simons, P. (1987). Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford: Clarendon.
30. Staab, S., & Studer, R. (2004). Handbookof Ontologies; International Handbooks on Information Systems. Berlin: Springer.
31. Stone, R.B., & Wood, K. (2000). Development of a functional basis for design. Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4), 359-276.
32. Thomasson, A. (1999). Fiction and Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Umeda, Y., Ishii, M., Yoshioka, M., Shimomura, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1996). Supporting conceptual design based on the function-behavior- state modeler. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10, 275-288.
34. Umeda, Y., Kohdoh, S., Shimomura, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (2005). Development of design methodology for upgradable products based on function- behavior-state modeling. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 19, 161-182.
35. Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1997). Functional reasoning in design. IEEE Expert: Intelligent Systems and Their Applications 12, 42-48.
36. Vermaas, P.E. (2007). The functional modelling account of Stone and Wood: some critical remarks. Proc. 16th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, Design for Society: Knowledge, Innovation and Sustainability, Abstract, Paris, 28-30 August, pp. 851-852, full paper on accompanying CD, Paris: Ecole Centrale.
37. Vermaas, P.E., & Dorst, K. (2007). On the conceptual framework of John Gero's FBS-model and the prescriptive aims of design methodology. Design Studies 28, 133-157.